June 23, 2014

Valmont vs Dangerous Liaisons

Milos Forman’s film Valmont came out in 1989, the year after Steven Frears’ Dangerous Liaisons. Both are based on Chloderos Laclos' scandalous 1782 novel Les Liaisons Dangereuses. Both feature rich and bored aristocrats and are set in Baroque France prior to the guillotine.

A scheming widow, the Marquise de Merteuil, and her sometimes-lover Valmont make a bet regarding the corruption of a recently married and very pious woman. Valmont wagers that he can seduce the newlywed, even though she is very honourable. If he wins, the Marquise promises him one last night with her. However, in the process of seducing the married woman, Valmont falls in love.

I prefer Valmont to Dangerous Liaisons. Colin Firth as Valmont does the "wet puffy shirt" before Mr. Darcy strips off in 1995’s Pride and Prejudice. Firth is passion and charisma to John Malkovich’s reptilian cold-bloodedness. I know who I’d rather snog with.

This was the first role I saw Annette Bening play. She’s ripe, peachy and pretty and looks too nice to play Madame Merteuil but she’s just as evil as Glenn Close.

Pretty Meg Tilly played the pious Madame de Tourvel. Well and truly seduced, Firth moved to the forests of Canada to be with her.

Here’s a list of the major players in Valmont and their equals in Dangerous Liaisons.

22 comments:

I've seen them both (Valmont, many times) and I'll take Firth over Malkovich any day of the week! Milos Forman's direction is stellar and there is so much humour and giddiness in Valmont. It's a feast for the senses and talk about titillating! the scene with Annette Bening in the bath is fabulous! Makes me want to go out and buy the film just to watch it again now.

But you can see the film glimmering underneath all the narration and goofily too-jaunty music! Thank you for the recommend, and reminder that I'd wanted then to see this. I miss so many films in the theater and never come back around to them like it seems it would be so easy to do.

That was an interesting piece. I saw "Dangerous Liasons" but have never seen "Valmont". I did not like the first one much; I was irritated by the loathsome bored aristocrats and John Malkovich creeps me out in everything he does.

Colin Firth is an extremely likeable actor and I can't imagine him playing against type so I'm thinking his depiction would be more appealing if such a character can be appealing

Question: when you write about Firth & Meg Tilly, did you mean they ran off together in real life? I'd not heard that either and I've always wondered what happened to Meg Tilly. Her sister is such a scream and, apparently, one hell of a poker player.

My favorite is the french made for TV version which takes place in the late 50's - early 60's, with Catherine Deneuve as Madame Merteuil and Rupert Everett as Valmont. They were both so evil! Anyone who loves this story should be sure not to miss this. The great cast also features Nastassia Kinski as Madame Tourvel, and Leelee Sobieski as Cecile Volanges.

The soundtracks to this film have also been interesting. Jazz great Art Blakey did the older black and white version. The french TV version also had a very good, eerie soundtrack. Was it Badalamenti or Morricione?

I will have to find the French version David Engel references. I love Catherine Deneuve and Rupert Everett. Interestingly enough, when I researched the Colin Firth/meg Tilly angle, I read that Firth and Everett have a not so friendly rivalry as actors. It was not explained but another bit of coincidence.

Have seen both but unaccountably have not seen Valmont in the past few years (I like the novel & play). So along with willow, I just put it in Netflix queue. I didn't find the French version referenced above but still looking elsewhere.

Well, interesting comments by all..... I have seen all three versions, the Rupert Everett, the Colin Firth and the John Malcovich. What I would say is that as this is a story that has sex at its core, then Valmont surely needs to be physically attractive - especially as he is so emotionally unattractive. My fave is the Rupert Everett version which is closely followed by Colin Firth. John Malcovich although an amazing actor just isn't pretty enough, and the rest of the cast were a bit too 'Hollywood' to provide enough edge. That said, what a story!

Both films attempt a realistic portrayal of baroque pre-napoleonic France based on a famous novel. Dangerously edges out on all aspects, set design, costumes, direction and acting by the main cast (except Keanu) but especially true in the main character of Valmont played by John Malkovich and Colin Firth. The character Valmont is a detestable and undermining womanizer who meets his match in the face of true love. Malkovich's cold and cunning characterization beats out Firth's warm and bumbling portrayal any day of the week. The later (firth) is perhaps more fun to watch being far less reviled but more unlike the true character of Valmont.

The imdb and rotten tomatoes comments and ratings are always a true evaluation of a film when taken together ,not apart and given ample time after a film is released. Both films are equal on imdb while Dangerously edges out Valmont 93 to 90 percent on tomatoes. Pretty accurate consensus if you ask me.